Rumors divide and “deja vu all over again”

In December of 2009, the Council of the Borough of Columbia faced an eerily similar situation concerning the discontinuance of an independent contractor (The IRS defines the role of an independent contractor) with a contract to manage the Market House.  It is curious to note that the Council then considered it a “personnel action” and dispatched the issue as such … in chambers. Terms of contracts involving independent contractors are personnel actions.

The reasons for discontinuance of a contract generally holds that most state laws contain verbiage that holds that “data about a person is not normally available to others … except for certain explicit exceptions, personal information maintained about an individual may not be disclosed without the person’s consent.”

The Council meeting minutes stated that a motion was passed: “To terminate the market manager agreement dated 11 May 2009 by and between the Borough of Columbia and Renae Sears and direct that the Council President will provide written notice to Ms. Sears that the aforesaid agreement shall terminate 30 days from the date of that notice in accordance with the terms of the Market Management agreement.”

We could locate no reports of independent council sub-committee meetings with protagonists or antagonists in 2009.

(SOURCE: Columbia news, views & reviews, March 2011)

In the absence of consistent, verifiable, “black-and-white” reporting, rumors inevitably become a source of information. The problem is, as General William Tecumseh Sherman noted, “I hate newspapermen. They come into camp and pick up their camp rumors and print them as facts. I regard them as spies, which, in truth, they are.”

Prudent reporting on a topic demands fact-checking and that means when a “rumor” surfaces, multiple sources need to be contacted to get all sides of truth (or facts) in the matter. Hey, we are going to make mistakes on this information platform, Columbia news, views & reviews, … but we are going to strive for fact-based articles. If we get wind of something by the rumor mill, we are either going to cite it as just that: a rumor. Or, more likely, we are going to talk with other sources or get the documentation. A great component of living in a free country is that citizens have access to government documents via the Right To Know Law.

Additionally, we try to subscribe to the Journalist’s Creed (The Journalist’s Creed was written [around 1906] by the first dean of the Missouri School of Journalism, Walter Williams. More than a century later, his declaration remains one of the clearest statements of the principles, values and standards of journalists throughout the world.)

  • I believe in the profession of journalism.
  • I believe that the public journal is a public trust; that all connected with it are, to the full measure of their responsibility, trustees for the public; that acceptance of a lesser service than the public service is betrayal of this trust.
  • I believe that clear thinking and clear statement, accuracy and fairness are fundamental to good journalism.
  • I believe that a journalist should write only what he holds in his heart to be true.
  • I believe that suppression of the news, for any consideration other than the welfare of society, is indefensible.
  • I believe that no one should write as a journalist what he would not say as a gentleman; that bribery by one’s own pocketbook is as much to be avoided as bribery by the pocketbook of another; that individual responsibility may not be escaped by pleading another’s instructions or another’s dividends.
  • I believe that advertising, news and editorial columns should alike serve the best interests of readers; that a single standard of helpful truth and cleanness should prevail for all; that the supreme test of good journalism is the measure of its public service.
  • I believe that the journalism which succeeds best — and best deserves success — fears God and honors Man; is stoutly independent, unmoved by pride of opinion or greed of power, constructive, tolerant but never careless, self-controlled, patient, always respectful of its readers but always unafraid, is quickly indignant at injustice; is unswayed by the appeal of privilege or the clamor of the mob; seeks to give every man a chance and, as far as law and honest wage and recognition of human brotherhood can make it so, an equal chance; is profoundly patriotic while sincerely promoting international good will and cementing world-comradeship; is a journalism of humanity, of and for today’s world.

And while rumors are juicier and more exciting to believe, we believe citizens are served better by truth and facts.

2 comments

  1. It appears to me that you are yet another one of the people who only know one side of the story since no one has seen you at any of the meetings…oh I am sorry…you have been seen…meeting with the trust…I forgot and actually you were seen just yesterday meeting with one member of the “trust” outside the market. It is funny that you can hide behind a computer with all your derogatory remarks and comments but fail to show up at public meetings to make your feelings known. Could it be that you yourself could be questioned as I am sure that you know all the answers and have been given all the information that you sir are not even privy to? At least the REAL reporters show up and get both sides of the story before writing an article. Could this be yet another one of your attempts to help the trust try to cover all their wrong doings by hiding under the “personnel” blanket? I am sure that you have read all the reports to see that “too little too late”. Before you question me only knowing one side of the story as I am sure you will in all your arrogance let me just tell you…I know the side of the story that is true and that is this….Carmen was wrongfully terminated…but the whole story is this…regardless of whether it was Carmen in the position or any other manager…it was WRONG!!! As far as the other side of the story…I am not sure there is one because no matter who on the trust you ask…it seems to be different. Some vendors get a letter that Carmen was “fired” while others get a letter that she “quit”, some say she “was not a good fit” while others say “it was in the best interest of the vendors” only to be told by yet another member of the “trust” that the “vendors have no say and their opinion does not matter, if they do not like it they can leave and they can be replaced as well”. And yet I am sure we are all just sitting here waiting for it to be made public that you will be one of the new “trust” members since you seem to be the brains behind the operation anyway and we all know that you all have the same personal agendas. You come to market walking around under your baseball hat snapping pictures but don’t speak to anyone….why dont you try to talk to stand holders and see what is going on instead of taking pictures, listening to one side of the story and painting your own little picture with all your photographs and clipart? Why don’t you try reporting REAL news…BOTH sides of the story?? How is it that you were in attendance to the trust meetings when not even all the members were notified of the meetings? Seriously…what part did you play in all of this? Are you trying to be a reporter or legal advisor? Because quite honestly…you are not very good at either! It appears to me that you would be a good fit for the “trust” as you yourself sir seem to have numerous personal agendas as do some of the other members on the “trust” and you just might be the “right fit” for their “vision” but just let me tell you this….The “trust” is not the right fit for OUR market, OUR town or OUR vision and neither are your reporting skills!!!

  2. Concerning the personal attacks and allegations of the comment below, we have made an exception to this part of the terms of service: “Comments with the primary purpose of attacking an individual or group of individuals are not welcome. We have a particularly low tolerance for anonymous commenters who make personal attacks without standing by their words with their real name.”

    Columbia news, views & reviews primarily is a secondary-source “aggregator” of news reported in other media. The editor is neither a reporter nor an aspirant to a position on the trust or at the Columbia Historic Market House.

Leave a reply to 17512 Columbia Cancel reply